Angelo J. Pompano
____
What would cause Americans to accept this invasion of their privacy when freedom of unrestricted mobility has been a cornerstone of our democracy? The answer can be found in the daily headlines. Because we have become so terrified of violent crime and terrorism, many of us accept the loss of some personal freedom for a feeling of security. On the surface video surveillance by police departments in public areas seems to be a noninvasive measure implemented for the well being of the public. Although they may not be happy with the use of the video surveillance equipment to catch them as they go through a red light, few people will argue with the reasoning that video cameras promote safety.
-
A bank ATM camera filmed a Ryder truck outside Oklahoma City’s federal office building just before the blast (April 1994) that killed 167 people. That clue helped police track down Timothy McVeigh.
It is commonplace for the audience of the nightly news to view footage of bank or store hold ups. Oftentimes this leads to the arrest of a suspect. Cases such as these make it hard to argue that video surveillance cameras should not be used.
Since 1993 police in Tacoma, Washington have been using video cameras mounted on lampposts and telephone poles to monitor an area plagued by gangs, drug dealers and prostitutes. One of the most extensive video surveillance systems in the country has been in use in Baltimore, Maryland since 1996. Both cities report a drop in crime in those areas under surveillance.
-
Frank Russo, a retired police commander and the public safety director for the Downtown Partnership of Baltimore, the merchant association that spearheaded the surveillance project, says that besides making law-abiding people feel safer, the cameras are in part responsible for an 11 percent drop in crime in the area during the first year of operation.
According to a 1996 California Research Bureau report on public-video surveillance, as reported by Alex Salkever in the article Too Many Unseen Cameras? the overwhelming majority of cities that use video in the US say it has helped cut crime. Of course it can be argued that the surveillance cameras do not actually reduce crime, but instead, shift it somewhere else.